Migrant women’s overall increased risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes is well known. The aim of this study was to investigate possible associations between stillbirth and maternal country of birth and other migration related factors (paternal origin, reason for immigration, length of residence and birthplace of firstborn child) in migrant women in Norway. Nationwide population-based study including births to primiparous and multiparous migrant women (n = 198,520) and non-migrant women (n = 1,156,444) in Norway between 1990 and 2013. Data from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway and Statistics Norway. Associations were investigated by multiple logistic regression and reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Primiparous women from Sri-Lanka and Pakistan, and multiparous women from Pakistan, Somalia, the Philippines and Former Yugoslavia had higher odds of stillbirth when compared to non-migrant women (adjusted OR ranged from 1.58 to 1.79 in primiparous and 1.50 to 1.71 in multiparous women). Primiparous migrant women whose babies were registered with Norwegian-born fathers had decreased odds of stillbirth compared to migrant women whose babies were registered with foreign-born fathers (aOR = 0.73; CI 0.58–0.93). Primiparous women migrating for work or education had decreased odds of stillbirth compared to Nordic migrants (aOR = 0.58; CI 0.39–0.88). Multiparous migrant women who had given birth to their first child before arriving in Norway had higher odds of stillbirth in later births in Norway compared with multiparous migrant women who had their first child after arrival (aOR = 1.28; CI 1.06–1.55). Stillbirth was not associated with length of residence in Norway. This study identifies sub-groups of migrant women who are at an increased risk of stillbirth, and highlights the need to improve care for them. More attention should be paid to women from certain countries, multiparous women who had their first baby before arrival and primiparous women whose babies have foreign-born fathers.

Background: There is limited evidence from multicenter, randomized controlled studies to inform planning and implementation of antibiotic stewardship interventions in hospitals. Methods: A cluster randomized, controlled, intervention study was performed in selected specialities (infectious diseases, pulmonary medicine and gastroenterology) at three emergency care hospitals in Western Norway. Interventions applied were audit with feedback and academic detailing. Implementation strategies included co-design of interventions with stakeholders in local intervention teams and prescribers setting local targets for change in antibiotic prescribing behaviour. Primary outcome measures were adherence to national guidelines, use of broad-spectrum antibiotics and change in locally defined targets of change in prescribing behaviour. Secondary outcome measures were length of stay, 30-day readmission, in-hospital- and 30-day mortality. Results: One thousand eight hundred two patients receiving antibiotic treatment were included. Adherence to guidelines had an absolute increase from 60 to 66% for all intervention wards (p = 0.04). Effects differed across specialties and pulmonary intervention wards achieved a 14% absolute increase in adherence (p = 0.003), while no change was observed for other specialties. A pulmonary ward targeting increased use of penicillin G 2 mill IU × 4 for pneumonia and COPD exacerbations had an intended increase of 30% for this prescribing behaviour (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Pulmonary wards had a higher increase in adherence, independent of applied intervention. The effect of antibiotic stewardship interventions is dependent on how and in which context they are implemented. Additional effects of interventions are seen when stakeholders discuss ward prescribing behaviour and agree on specific targets for changes in prescribing practice.

Clinical antibiotic prescribing guidelines are essential in defining responsible use in the local context. Our objective was to investigate the association between adherence to national antibiotic prescribing guidelines and patient outcomes across a wide range of infectious diseases in hospital inpatients. Over five months in 2014, inpatients receiving antibiotics under the care of pulmonary medicine, infectious diseases and gastroenterology specialties across three university hospitals in Western Norway were included in this observational cohort study. Patient and antibiotic prescribing data gathered from electronic medical records included indication for antibiotics, microbiology test results, discharge diagnoses, length of stay (LOS), comorbidity, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) on admission and patient outcomes (primary: 30-day mortality; secondary: in-hospital mortality, 30-day readmission and LOS). Antibiotic prescriptions were classified as adherent or non-adherent to national guidelines according to documented indication for treatment. Patient outcomes were analysed according to status for adherence to guidelines using multivariate logistic, linear and competing risk regression analysis with adjustments made for comorbidity, age, sex, indication for treatment, seasonality and whether the patient was admitted from an institution or not. In total, 1756 patients were included in the study. 30-day-mortality and in-hospital mortality were lower (OR = 0.48, p = 0.003 and OR = 0.46, p = 0.001) in the guideline adherent group, compared to the non-adherent group. Adherence to guideline did not affect 30-day readmission. In linear regression analysis there was a trend towards shorter LOS when LOS was analysed for patients discharged alive (predicted mean difference − 0.47, 95% CI (− 1.02, 0.07), p = 0.081). In competing risk analysis of LOS, the adherent group had a subdistribution hazard ratio (SHR) of 1.17 95% CI (1.02, 1.34), p = 0.025 for discharge compared to the non-adherent group. Adhering to antibiotic guidelines when treating infections in hospital inpatients was associated with favourable patient outcomes in terms of mortality and LOS.

To investigate whether the occurrence of preeclampsia varied by maternal reasons for immigration. We included 1,287,270 singleton pregnancies (163,508 to immigrant women) in Norway during 1990–2013. Individual data were obtained through record linkage between the Medical Birth Registry of Norway and Statistics Norway. Analyses were performed for preeclampsia overall and in combination with preterm birth < 37 and < 34 weeks of gestation, referred to as preterm and very preterm preeclampsia. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using logistic regression with robust standard errors, adjusted for relevant covariates, including maternal income and education. Preeclampsia was reported in 3.5% of Norwegian women and 2.5% of immigrants. Compared with Norwegian women, the adjusted OR for preeclampsia was lowest in labour immigrants (adjusted OR 0.55 [95% CI 0.49–0.62]), followed by family immigrants (0.62 [0.59–0.65]), immigrant students (0.75 [0.65–0.86]), refugees (0.81 [0.75–0.88]), and immigrants from other Nordic countries (0.87 [0.80–0.94]). Compared with Norwegian women, labour immigrants also had lower adjusted odds of preterm and very preterm preeclampsia, whereas refugees had increased adjusted odds of preterm and very preterm preeclampsia (< 37 weeks: 1.18 [1.02–1.36], and < 34 weeks: 1.41 [1.15–1.72]). The occurrence of preeclampsia was lower overall in immigrants than in non-immigrants, but associations varied by maternal reasons for immigration. Maternity caregivers should pay increased attention to pregnant women with refugee backgrounds due to their excess odds of preterm preeclampsia.